Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Tinsley Is The Worst Point Guard

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Re: Tinsley Is The Worst Point Guard

    The Pacers were outscored by 9 points in the final 2 minutes of the third. That's where the game was lost. The team fell apart with McLeod, Marshall and Baston all playing at the same time.
    I'm in these bands
    The Humans
    Dr. Goldfoot
    The Bar Brawlers
    ME

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Tinsley Is The Worst Point Guard

      Yeah.

      OT, but here's a picture of your buddy Clint driving to the Oscars yesterday.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Tinsley Is The Worst Point Guard

        Originally posted by Alpolloloco View Post
        I rather have Jasikevicius than Tinsley at the moment, even though his defense is just as worse.
        Say it ain't so!!! I refuse to beleive you've flip-flopped so hard on this issue.



        Anyway, how can a PG that goes 3-8 with 5 assists, 1 steal, 3 TOs and 5 fouls be WORSE than a PG that goes 3-11 with 3 assists, 1 steal, 3 TOs and 5 fouls?

        Sure DA got his 3 assists in only 20 minutes to Tins 30, but that also means he shot it more per minute (at a worse rate), turned it over more per minute and fouled more per minute.

        So all I have to do to see proof that Tins isn't the worst is to look at the home team's roster.


        DA is a lot of fun to watch, but he is a backup and his age/shoulder are really biting into his game now that we are deep into the season. Sucks to see it happen, but it's a problem.

        Tins is weaker defender against the dribble, no question, but isn't it also odd that OVERALL the team is worse defensively now than it was 2 months ago...with Tinsley on the team.

        It's funny to see Jack haters or Dun lovers (is there a difference) skate around the issue that I brought up at the time of the trade. Golden State was not as good a defensive team as the Pacers were at the time, and 2 of the major minutes guys from that team came over to the Pacers.

        Who really thought they had nothing to do with GS being a poor defensive team?

        So the problem is you lost Jack at SG for defense, you slowed way down with Dun defending the edge, you still have Tins, and as nice as Murph is with his scoring and rebounding he is a brutally poor defender too (worse than uninspired Harrington even).


        The Pacers didn't just get to improve only, in trades you give to get, and they gave up some defense in order to move Jack and to try and solve the offensive end.

        That puts the rest of the team in the same shoes as Tinsley, nice on offense, not so great on defense.


        It's also ironic that I heard a lot of fans complaining about the grinding Pacers, the defensive heavy Pacers that kept games 85-80. At least those teams won. And now people are getting uptight about the lack of defense.

        Be careful what you wish for. And the same might be true regarding wishing Tinsley away. You can improve that position, sure, but you can also do much worse, more than some fans realize I think.

        Either way, swapping out the PG won't solve the problem.



        Armstrong was guarding Bibby. Jamaal was taken out due to foul trouble.
        I haven't been able to watch the full tape, I was able to watch portions though. I did see a period where Tins had to go over to Martin and that was not a pleasant matchup. That has as much to do with KMart though. Hmm, just the other day I was saying "if only they'd traded Ron for Martin instead of Peja", and they could have gotten that done I'm sure. Not both, just Martin. And Pacers fans would have been PO'd. Well some, not me for sure. They sure could use an SG like that right about now, probably more than Murphy (assuming Al was moved for him in the big trade - Ron-Peja-Al-Murph, wow, it's only been 1 year since they moved Ron and you have this chain already).

        Originally posted by Dr. Goldfoot View Post
        The Pacers were outscored by 9 points in the final 2 minutes of the third. That's where the game was lost. The team fell apart with McLeod, Marshall and Baston all playing at the same time.
        I haven't seen this portion yet. Doesn't sound good. I guess that was foul trouble time. Sounds more like the lack of Quis hurt the team again (due to depth). People love Baston, but as much as I like some parts of his game, he's not a very good post defender. He's a great shot blocker, but he has a tough time denying a decent post look. And then 3 guys whose games are a bit more green, that's not really what you want to see on court together.

        I'll get a chance to watch the rest tonight and see for myself.

        kick out to DunDun for an uncontested 3.....miss, 2 plays later, dribble penetration, kick out to Murphy for the uncontested 3.......misss. next play dribble penetration for the kickout to Danny at the side for an uncontested 3. want to guess the result?
        Unfortunately I did see that segment, as least the Dun and Murph shots. I know all PGs lose out on that stuff, but man those were WIDE open looks and in big part created by Tinsley. "Bad shot" Tinsley went 2-3 from the arc. Rest of the team 3-15. Now that will make you sick.


        Armstrong replaced Williams to start the second half with Jamaal Tinsley sliding to shooting guard and Dunleavy to small forward.
        Let's see, how did the 1st go vs the 3rd? I'm glad they took Shawne over Marcus personally.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Tinsley Is The Worst Point Guard

          Originally posted by able View Post
          DIY or "dump into JO" were the ONLY plays open that had "some" result.
          I wouldn't use the word "dump" when talking about Jamaal Tinsley.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Tinsley Is The Worst Point Guard

            Originally posted by indy0731 View Post
            Unfortunately we don't have a legit backup PG. Our 38 year old supposedly calm and cool PG went 3/11 tonight and got a T in 11 less minutes than Tinsley.
            I enjoy DA as much as anyone, but he has never and will never be called calm and cool. That is not who he is. So don't expect that.


            The Pacers fell apart when Marshal and McLoud were in the game together late in the 3rd quarter. When Tinsley was brought back in I sighed and sigh of relief because at least he can dribble the ball

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Tinsley Is The Worst Point Guard

              Originally posted by Unclebuck
              I enjoy DA as much as anyone, but he has never and will never be called calm and cool. That is not who he is. So don't expect that.


              The Pacers fell apart when Marshal and McLoud were in the game together late in the 3rd quarter. When Tinsley was brought back in I sighed and sigh of relieve because at least he can dribble the ball
              Well thats what we need from him right now. His game is falling off as this season wears on and it could be expected, but we need a leader right now and we can't have a guy we need to be a leader shooting 11 times and only making 3.


              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Tinsley Is The Worst Point Guard

                DA makes a lot of bad decisions with the ball for a PG. An ill-advised length of the court pass. A rushed three pointer. Sound familiar?

                Armstrong hustles because that's all he's got, but he's not the solution.

                I'm not opposed to watching McLeod a bit more, but the McLeod and Marshall backcourt was just awful at both ends of the court. That went from a close game to a blowout in no time.
                Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                And life itself, rushing over me
                Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Tinsley Is The Worst Point Guard

                  Originally posted by indy0731 View Post
                  Well thats what we need from him right now. His game is falling off as this season wears on and it could be expected, but we need a leader right now and we can't have a guy we need to be a leader shooting 11 times and only making 3.
                  We might need it, but he can't provide it. I think he has and will continue to provide leadership - but cool and collected is not what got him into the NBA and that isn't what he is.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Tinsley Is The Worst Point Guard

                    I don't know about ANY point guard being able to replace Tinsley. Honestly after seing McCleod TRY to run the point last night i was kinda beggin for them to bring JT back in. Kinda sad huh?
                    "and I say a monkey CAN mow our lawn!!!"

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Tinsley Is The Worst Point Guard

                      I just cant understand this at all....

                      Take a look at the last 5 games for Tinsley and then rethink what ur saying .... you must understand a lot of the shots that PGs take in this league are when there are no other options available ... Usually when the shot clock is down or the offence is static its the PG that has to force up a shot ... this really hurts shootin %ages .... dont get me wrong i dont think Tins is amazing ... but he is deffinitly our best option as has been playing resonably well ... yes is shooting %age is low yes he D isnt very good ... but he is passing the ball well ... he is getting steels and he is doing as his coach tells him to do .... There is no question he is our starting PG and probably our 3rd best player


                      Tins defense may not be great but there is no possible way that u can say Darrels is that much better ... our PnR defence sucked pretty much all game!!


                      I am at a loss at the lack of love for Tins that seems to be gettin worse ... he aint perfect but he deffinitly isnt as bad as u say! ... those assists have shot up ... hes averaging around 10 assist a game for the last 5!

                      I just dont understand the hate being so strong!!
                      'All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.'
                      Animal Farm, by George Orwell

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Tinsley Is The Worst Point Guard

                        I've been hoping all year long that they would move Tins, but they haven't. As much as I dislike his game, there's no case to be made for any of the other PG's on the roster. Tins is the best PG we have, and it's not even close. Things have gotten so bad that I know cringe when DA comes into the game for Tinsley.

                        There are a couple things that need to happen for this team to win any amount of games for the rest of the year.

                        1. Tins, Daniels, and JO need to play about 40 min/game. There are no adequate replacements on the roster.

                        2. None of those three can miss more than a couple games with injuries.

                        3. The two PG lineup needs to be put to bed for good, as does the McLeod-Marshall backcourt and the Foster-Baston frontcourt.

                        4. Rick needs to sub more quickly. The Pacers were up by a few points at halftime last night. Two minutes into the 3rd quarter it was obvious that the lineup on the floor wasn't working. They were out there for at least 5 more minutes before he made a change.

                        5. The Pacers need to learn how to play an effective zone defense. This would allow them to hide players like Dunleavy, Murphy, DA, Tins, and Ike who can't guard anybody one on one.
                        "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                        - Salman Rushdie

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Tinsley Is The Worst Point Guard

                          Those are all very valid suggestions. This is the roster we've got for the rest of the season. Its not a champioship-caliber roster. But its not a lottery-bound roster, either. Assuming the coach maximizes their performance.

                          Rick generally gets there, but it takes him a while to acknowledge when one of his ideas goes awry. He's a bit like Wile E. Coyote that way, isn't he?
                          Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                          Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                          Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                          Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                          And life itself, rushing over me
                          Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                          Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Tinsley Is The Worst Point Guard

                            Originally posted by Jay@Section19 View Post
                            I'm not opposed to watching McLeod a bit more, but the McLeod and Marshall backcourt was just awful at both ends of the court. That went from a close game to a blowout in no time.
                            I think last night's game was heading that direction when we had a 7 point lead. I kept telling my roommates that we would be down by 20 by then end of the third quarter if we kept playing like that.

                            That's not to say the Ms weren't awful as a tandem. I was hoping Tinsley would come back in; that's how bad it was. Rawle shouldn't be playing, and I was very disappointed with McLeod. I thought that starting for Jerry Sloan would probably be good enough for me, but last night was atrocious.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Tinsley Is The Worst Point Guard

                              Originally posted by aero View Post
                              I really like Shawn Williams and all but, we REALLY REALLY should have drafted a PG
                              I absolutely agree with you. He is a very nice player, but it was a little parallel to Danny, when the greater need was point guard. Marcus Williams, Fordan Farmar, Dee Brown in the 2nd round...all of these guys were available for the Pacers. Especially Dee Brown. I don't know how great he'll be, but if you're going to take a flyer on a player, why not pick up tremendous speed and quickness at the point guard position ? Hard to figure out the thinking there. I like Jamaal, but he just isn't the answer, and from reading the 1-on-1's the top brass know that as well.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Tinsley Is The Worst Point Guard

                                Originally posted by imawhat View Post
                                I think last night's game was heading that direction when we had a 7 point lead. I kept telling my roommates that we would be down by 20 by then end of the third quarter if we kept playing like that.
                                I like this point. I see other debates going on about how when player X went to the bench the deficit got so much larger or when X guys were on the court the D was notably more porous, etc., etc.

                                While there may be some truth to some of these assertions, it was painfully obvious from the tip that we again were not significantly mentally and emotionally engaged. We should have been up near 20 points in the first half but we still had the lacksadaisical sheen to our play.

                                While JO and Jeff did appear to be the only guys really dialed in IMO, it's really about the big picture. What does it take to fire the guys up? I blame them and the coaches. It's got to come from within and without at this level.

                                RC looked noticeably pissed by his standards when they got the dunk while we were just whining and lollygaging back. Yet it didn't appear he ever let the player know. Maybe you can't ride em that hard all the time, but if ever there were an acceptable time to let em have it, that was it.
                                I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                                -Emiliano Zapata

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X